Lung cancer diagnostic and treatment intervals in the United States: a health care disparity?

Economic Value of Bronchoscopy Technologies that Improves Sensitivity for Malignancy for Peripheral Pulmonary Lesions

Rationale: Although previous studies have assessed the clinical or economic value of specific technologies, the economic value of improving sensitivity for malignancy in lung cancer diagnoses broadly across technologies is unclear. Objectives: To identify the economic value of improving sensitivity of bronchoscopy biopsy for the diagnosis of lung cancer. Methods: A decision analytic model was developed to quantify the economic value of increased sensitivity for malignancy for bronchoscopy biopsy of peripheral pulmonary lesions. Primary clinical outcomes included time to diagnosis and survival. Economic outcomes included 1) net monetary benefit (NMB), defined as the health benefits measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) times willingness to pay ($100,000/QALY) net of changes in medical costs; and 2) incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. A decision tree modeling framework with two Markov module branches was developed. The two Markov modules corresponded to patients with cancer who were 1) diagnosed and treated or 2) undiagnosed and remained untreated. Outcomes were measured from a U.S. payer perspective over 30 years. Results: Improving sensitivity for malignancy by 10 percentage points decreased average time to diagnosis for patients with lung cancer by 0.85 month (4 wk) and increased survival by 0.36 year (19 wk) because of faster treatment initiation. Overall health outcomes improved by 0.20 QALYs per patient. Cost increased by $6,727 per patient primarily through increased treatment costs among those diagnosed with cancer. Increasing sensitivity for malignancy by 10 percentage points improved NMB by $8,729 over 30 years (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $34,052), driven largely by improved sensitivity to early-stage cancer (stage-specific NMB, I/II, $19,805; III, $2,101; IV, -$1,438). Forty-two percent of overall NMB ($3,668) accrued within 5 years of biopsy. The relationship between change in sensitivity and NMB was approximately linear (1% vs. 10% sensitivity improvement corresponded to NMB of $885 vs. $8,729). The model was most sensitive to cancer treatment efficacy and follow-up time after a negative result. Conclusions: Increasing sensitivity of malignancy by 10 percentage points resulted in a $8,729 improvement in net economic value. Health systems can use this information when making decisions regarding the value of new bronchoscopy technologies.

Multilevel factors associated with delays in screening, diagnosis, and treatment for lung cancer-A mixed methods systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Factors affecting time to lung cancer care may occur at multiple levels of influence. Mixed-methods reviews provide an approach for collectively synthesizing both quantitative and qualitative data. Prior reviews on timeliness of lung cancer care have included only either quantitative or qualitative data, been agnostic of the multilevel nature of influencing factors, or focused on a single factor such as gender or socioeconomic inequalities.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to update the literature on systematic reviews and identify multilevel factors associated with delays in lung cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment.

DESIGN

The proposed systematic review will be conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Manual for Evidence Synthesis specific for mixed methods systematic reviews. Reporting will be consistent with PRISMA guidelines.

METHODS

Medline (PubMed), CINAHL, and SCOPUS will be searched using validated search terms for lung cancer and factors, health disparities and time/delay. Eligible studies will include original articles with quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods designs that investigate health disparities in, risk factors for, or barriers to timely screening, confirmatory diagnosis, or treatment among patients with lung cancer or those at risk for lung cancer. Title, abstract, and full-text screening, study quality assessment, and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers. A convergent integrated approach with thematic synthesis will be applied to synthesize the extracted and generated analytical themes.

DISCUSSION

Findings from this review will inform the design of an intervention to address delays in lung cancer screening for high-risk persons, diagnosis of suspected lung cancer, and treatment of confirmed cases.

Association Between Copayment Assistance, Insurance Type, Prior Authorization, and Time to Receipt of Oral Anticancer Drugs

PURPOSE

Oral anticancer drugs (OACDs) have become increasingly prevalent over the past decade. OACD prescriptions require coordination between payers and providers, which can delay drug receipt. We examined the association between insurance type, pursuit of copayment assistance, pursuit of prior authorization (PA), and time to receipt (TTR) for new OACD prescriptions.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on new OACD prescriptions for adult oncology patients from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019, including demographic and clinical characteristics, insurance type, and pursuit of PA and copayment assistance. TTR was defined as the number of days from prescription to OACD receipt. We summarized TTR using cumulative incidence and compared TTR by insurance type, pursuit of copayment assistance, and PA activity using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

Our cohort of 1,024 patients was 53% male, and 40% were younger than 65. Twenty-six percent had commercial insurance only, 16% had Medicaid only, and 59% had Medicare with or without additional insurance. Eighty-six percent of prescriptions were successfully received. Across all prescriptions, 69% involved PA activity, and 21% involved the copayment assistance process. In unadjusted analyses, prescriptions involving the copayment assistance process had longer TTR compared with those not involving assistance (log-rank P value = .005) and OACDs covered by Medicare/commercial insurance had a longer TTR compared with Medicaid (log-rank P value = .006). The PA process was not associated with TTR (log-rank P value = .124).

CONCLUSION

The process for obtaining OACDs is complex. The copayment assistance process and Medicare/commercial insurance are associated with delayed TTR. New policies are needed to reduce time to OACD receipt.

Delays to surgery and worse outcomes: The compounding effects of social determinants of health in non-small cell lung cancer

Objective

To quantify the compounding effects of social determinants of health on time to surgery (T2S) and clinical outcomes.

Methods

The National Cancer Database was queried for treatment-naïve patients with cT1-4N0-1M0 non-small cell lung cancer undergoing (bi)lobectomy or pneumonectomy between 2006 and 2016 with 1 to 180 days T2S, the number of days between diagnosis and surgery; surgical delays were defined as statistically significant increased T2S compared with a reference cohort. Social determinants of health factors prognostic for surgical delays were identified using multivariable regression. The 30-/90-day mortality and 5-year survival estimates were calculated using logistic and Cox regressions, respectively.

Results

In total, 110,005 patients met inclusionary criteria. Multivariable analysis identified race, insurance, and facility type as factors with significant 3-way interaction: T2S of one depended on the others. Income and education also contributed to delays. Privately insured (private) non-Hispanic White patients at academic medical centers (AMCs) were the reference with T2S of 44.1 days. At AMCs, private Black patients had significant delays to surgery (54.7 days; P < .0001), as did Medicaid and uninsured Black patients (58.5 days; P < .0001, 59.4 days; P < .0001, respectively). The 15-day surgical delays were associated with statistically significant 5% increased 30-day mortality odds (confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.08), 6% increased 90-day mortality odds (CI, 1.04-1.08), and 4% decrease in hazard of death at 5 years (CI, 1.04-1.05).

Conclusions

In treatment-naïve patients with cT1-4N0-1M0 non-small cell lung cancer, Black race, Medicaid, uninsured status, and AMCs generate compounding surgical delays with increased 30-/90-day mortality and decreased 5-year survival. Thoracic surgeons can leverage these facility and demographic-specific insights to standardize time to surgery and begin mitigating underlying disparities.

Assessing Barriers and Facilitators to Lung Cancer Screening: Initial Findings from a Patient Navigation Intervention

Low-dose computed tomography-based lung cancer screening represents a complex clinical undertaking that could require multiple referrals, appointments, and time-intensive procedures. These steps may pose difficulties and raise concerns among patients, particularly minority, under-, and uninsured populations. The authors implemented patient navigation to identify and address these challenges. They conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of telephone-based navigation for lung cancer screening in an integrated, urban safety-net health care system. Following standardized protocols, bilingual (Spanish and English) navigators educated, motivated, and empowered patients to traverse the health system. Navigators made systematic contact with patients, recording standardized call characteristics in a study-specific database. Call type, duration, and content were recorded. Univariable and multivariable multinomial logistic regression was performed to investigate associations between call characteristics and reported barriers. Among 225 patients (mean age 63 years, 46% female, 70% racial/ethnic minority) assigned navigation, a total of 559 barriers to screening were identified during 806 telephone calls. The most common barrier categories were personal (46%), provider (30%), and practical (17%). System (6%) and psychosocial (1%) barriers were described by English-speaking patients, but not by Spanish-speaking patients. Over the course of the lung cancer screening process, provider-related barriers decreased 80% (P = 0.008). The authors conclude that patients undergoing lung cancer screening frequently report personal and health care provider-related barriers to successful participation. Barrier types may differ among patient populations and over the course of the screening process. Further understanding of these concerns may increase screening uptake and adherence. Clinical Trial Registration number: (NCT02758054).

Timeliness of Lung Cancer Care From the Point of Suspicious Image at an Urban Safety Net Hospital

BACKGROUND

Timeliness of care is an important metric for lung cancer patients, and care delays in the safety-net setting have been described. Timeliness from the point of the suspicious image is not well-studied. Herein, we evaluate time intervals in the workup of lung cancer at an urban, safety net hospital and assess for disparities by demographic and clinical factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of lung cancer patients receiving some portion of their care at Boston Medical Center between 2015 and 2020. A total of 687 patients were included in the final analysis. Median times from suspicious image to first treatment (SIT), suspicious image to diagnosis (SID), and diagnosis to treatment (DT) were calculated. Nonparametric tests were applied to assess for intergroup differences in time intervals.

RESULTS

SIT, SID, and DT for the entire cohort was 78, 34, and 32 days, respectively. SIT intervals were 87 days for females and 72 days for males (p < .01). SIT intervals were 106, 110, 81, and 41 days for stages I, II, III, and IV, respectively (p < .01). SID intervals differed between black (40.5) and Hispanic (45) patients compared to white (28) and Asian (23) patients (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

Advanced stage at presentation and male gender were associated with more timely treatment from the point of suspicious imaging while white and Asian were associated with more timely lung cancer diagnosis. Future analyses should seek to elucidate drivers of timeliness differences and assess for the impact of timeliness disparities on patient outcomes in the safety net setting.

European Respiratory Society guideline on various aspects of quality in lung cancer care

This European Respiratory Society guideline is dedicated to the provision of good quality recommendations in lung cancer care. All the clinical recommendations contained were based on a comprehensive systematic review and evidence syntheses based on eight PICO (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes) questions. The evidence was appraised in compliance with the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Evidence profiles and the GRADE Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to summarise results and to make the decision-making process transparent. A multidisciplinary Task Force panel of lung cancer experts formulated and consented the clinical recommendations following thorough discussions of the systematic review results. In particular, we have made recommendations relating to the following quality improvement measures deemed applicable to routine lung cancer care: 1) avoidance of delay in the diagnostic and therapeutic period, 2) integration of multidisciplinary teams and multidisciplinary consultations, 3) implementation of and adherence to lung cancer guidelines, 4) benefit of higher institutional/individual volume and advanced specialisation in lung cancer surgery and other procedures, 5) need for pathological confirmation of lesions in patients with pulmonary lesions and suspected lung cancer, and histological subtyping and molecular characterisation for actionable targets or response to treatment of confirmed lung cancers, 6) added value of early integration of palliative care teams or specialists, 7) advantage of integrating specific quality improvement measures, and 8) benefit of using patient decision tools. These recommendations should be reconsidered and updated, as appropriate, as new evidence becomes available.

Increasing Time-to-Treatment for Lung Cancer: Are We Going Backward?

BACKGROUND

Treatment delays in lung cancer care in the United States may be attributable to a diverse range of patient, provider, and institutional factors, the precise contributions of which remain unclear. The objective of our study was to use the National Cancer Database to investigate specific predictors of increased time-to-treatment initiation.

METHODS

We identified 567 783 patients undergoing treatment for stage I to stage IV non-small cell lung cancer during 2010 to 2018. Time-to-treatment initiation was defined as the number of days from radiologic diagnosis to initiation of first treatment. We used mixed effect negative binomial regression to determine predictors of time-to-treatment initiation.

RESULTS

We noted a steady rise in the overall mean time-to-treatment initiation interval from 33 days (2010) to 39 days (2018; P < .01). Black race, a later year at diagnosis, nonprivate insurance, and diagnosis and treatment at different facilities were independent predictors of increased time-to-treatment initiation, irrespective of disease stage. Compared with White race, Black race corresponded to a 15% to 20% increase in time-to-treatment initiation, depending on disease stage (P < .01). For stages I and II, radiation as first course of therapy corresponded with a 69% and 33% increase in time-to-treatment initiation, respectively, compared with surgery (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Lung cancer treatment initiation times have seen an upward trajectory in recent years. Black patients encountered significantly longer treatment initiation times, regardless of treatment modality or disease stage. Prolonged initiation times appear to contribute to existing health care disparities by disproportionately affecting medically underserved communities.

Effect of an Antiracism Intervention on Racial Disparities in Time to Lung Cancer Surgery

PURPOSE

Timely lung cancer surgery is a metric of high-quality cancer care and improves survival for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. Historically, Black patients experience longer delays to surgery than White patients and have lower survival rates. Antiracism interventions have shown benefits in reducing racial disparities in lung cancer treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of Accountability for Cancer Care through Undoing Racism and Equity, an antiracism prospective pragmatic trial, at five cancer centers to assess the impact on overall timeliness of lung cancer surgery and racial disparities in timely surgery. The intervention consisted of (1) a real-time warning system to identify unmet care milestones, (2) race-specific feedback on lung cancer treatment rates, and (3) patient navigation. The primary outcome was surgery within 8 weeks of diagnosis. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were estimated using log-binomial regression and adjusted for clinical and demographic factors.

RESULTS

A total of 2,363 patients with stage I and II non-small-cell lung cancer were included in the analyses: intervention (n = 263), retrospective control (n = 1,798), and concurrent control (n = 302). 87.1% of Black patients and 85.4% of White patients in the intervention group (P = .13) received surgery within 8 weeks of diagnosis compared with 58.7% of Black patients and 75.0% of White patients in the retrospective group (P < .01) and 64.9% of Black patients and 73.2% of White patients (P = .29) in the concurrent group. Black patients in the intervention group were more likely to receive timely surgery than Black patients in the retrospective group (RR 1.43; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.64). White patients in the intervention group also had timelier surgery than White patients in the retrospective group (RR 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.18).

CONCLUSION

Accountability for Cancer Care through Undoing Racism and Equity is associated with timelier lung cancer surgery and reduction of the racial gap in timely surgery.

Defining timeliness in care for patients with lung cancer: a scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Early diagnosis and reducing the time taken to achieve each step of lung cancer care is essential. This scoping review aimed to examine time points and intervals used to measure timeliness and to critically assess how they are defined by existing studies of the care seeking pathway for lung cancer.

METHODS

This scoping review was guided by the methodological framework for scoping reviews by Arksey and O'Malley. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO electronic databases were searched for articles published between 1999 and 2019. After duplicate removal, all publications went through title and abstract screening followed by full text review and inclusion of articles in the review against the selection criteria. A narrative synthesis describes the time points, intervals and measurement guidelines used by the included articles.

RESULTS

A total of 2113 articles were identified from the initial search. Finally, 68 articles were included for data charting process. Eight time points and 14 intervals were identified as the most common events researched by the articles. Eighteen different lung cancer care guidelines were used to benchmark intervals in the included articles; all were developed in Western countries. The British Thoracic Society guideline was the most frequently used guideline (20%). Western guidelines were used by the studies in Asian countries despite differences in the health system structure.

CONCLUSION

This review identified substantial variations in definitions of some of the intervals used to describe timeliness of care for lung cancer. The differences in healthcare delivery systems of Asian and Western countries, and between high-income countries and low-income-middle-income countries may suggest different sets of time points and intervals need to be developed.

Increase in the Length of Lung Cancer Patient Pathway Before First-Line Therapy: A 6-Year Nationwide Analysis From Hungary

Objective: This study aimed to examine the characteristics of the lung cancer (LC) patient pathway in Hungary during a 6-years period.

Methods: This nationwide, retrospective study included patients newly diagnosed with LC (ICD-10 C34) between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2016, using data from the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF) of Hungary. The following patient pathway intervals were examined: system, diagnostic and treatment interval by age, gender, tumor type, study year and first-line LC therapy.

Results: During the 6-years study period, 17,386 patients had at least one type of imaging (X-ray or CT/MRI) prior to diagnosis, and 12,063 had records of both X-ray and CT/MRI. The median system interval was 64.5 days, and it was 5 days longer among women, than in men (68.0 vs. 63.0 days). The median system interval was significantly longer in patients with adenocarcinoma compared to those with squamous cell carcinoma or small cell lung cancer (70.4 vs. 64.0 vs. 48.0 days, respectively). Patients who received surgery as first-line treatment had significantly longer median system intervals compared to those receiving chemotherapy (81.4 vs. 62.0 days). The median system interval significantly increased from 62.0 to 66.0 days during the 6-years study period.

Conclusion: The LC patient pathway significantly increased in Hungary over the 6-years study period. There were no significant differences in the length of the whole LC patient pathway according to age, however, female sex, surgery as first-line treatment, and adenocarcinoma were associated with longer system intervals.

Cost-Effectiveness of Lorlatinib as a First-Line Therapy for Untreated Advanced Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Introduction

Recently, a phase III CROWN trial compared the efficacy of two anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitors and demonstrated that lorlatinib displayed clinical improvement over crizotinib for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of lorlatinib as a first-line therapy for patients with advanced ALK-positive (+) NSCLC.

Materials and Methods

A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a microsimulation model from the US payer perspective and a lifetime horizon (30 years) in patients with previous untreated advanced ALK+ NSCLC. Based on the CROWN trial, patient characteristics were obtained, and the transition probabilities were estimated. All direct costs were derived from official sources and published literature. The main outcomes of the model were total costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and life years (LYs). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses and multiple scenario analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the model outcomes.

Results

In the base case analysis, in which 1 million patients were simulated, treatment with lorlatinib or crizotinib as the first-line treatment was related to a mean cost of $909,758 and $616,230 (incremental cost: $293,528) and a mean survival of 4.81 QALYs and 4.09 QALYs (incremental QALY: 0.72) per patient, respectively. The main drivers of cost effectiveness were drug price and subsequent cost. PAS indicated that lorlatinib has 90% cost-effectiveness when compared to crizotinib when the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold in increased to $448,000/QALY. Scenario analysis demonstrated that lorlatinib has 100% cost-effectiveness at a WTP threshold of 200,000/QALY compared to crizotinib treatment when the price of lorlatinib is decreased to 75% ($424.5) of its original price.

Conclusions

In this study, lorlatinib was unlikely to be cost effective compared with crizotinib for patients with previously untreated advanced ALK+ NSCLC at a WTP threshold of 200,000/QALY.

Understanding the patient journey to diagnosis of lung cancer

OBJECTIVE

This research describes the clinical pathway and characteristics of two cohorts of patients. The first cohort consists of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of lung cancer while the second consists of patients with a solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN) and no evidence of lung cancer. Linked data from an electronic medical record and the Louisiana Tumor Registry were used in this investigation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

REACHnet is one of 9 clinical research networks (CRNs) in PCORnet®, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network and includes electronic health records for over 8 million patients from multiple partner health systems. Data from Ochsner Health System and Tulane Medical Center were linked to Louisiana Tumor Registry (LTR), a statewide population-based cancer registry, for analysis of patient's clinical pathways between July 2013 and 2017. Patient characteristics and health services utilization rates by cancer stage were reported as frequency distributions. The Kaplan-Meier product limit method was used to estimate the time from index date to diagnosis by stage in lung cancer cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 30,559 potentially eligible patients were identified and 2929 (9.58%) had primary lung cancer. Of these, 1496 (51.1%) were documented in LTR and their clinical pathway to diagnosis was further studied. Time to diagnosis varied significantly by cancer stage. A total of 24,140 patients with an SPN were identified in REACHnet and 15,978 (66.6%) had documented follow up care for 1 year. 1612 (10%) had no evidence of any work up for their SPN. The remaining 14,366 had some evidence of follow up, primarily office visits and additional chest imaging.

CONCLUSION

In both cohorts multiple biopsies were evident in the clinical pathway. Despite clinical workup, 70% of patients in the lung cancer cohort had stage III or IV disease. In the SPN cohort, only 66% were identified as receiving a diagnostic work-up.

Barriers and explanatory mechanisms in diagnostic delay in four cancers - A health-care disparity?

Introduction:

Most cancer disparities research has traditionally focused on two key outcomes, access to appropriate treatment and survival, but they do not encompass important aspects of patient-centered care such as the timeliness of diagnosis and treatment. Prolonged time intervals between symptom onset and treatment initiation increase the risk of poorer clinical outcomes and are associated with worse patient experience of subsequent cancer care. This study aims to assess the delay from symptom onset to the start of definitive treatment and to identify the possible contributory factors and its impact on response in cancers of head and neck, breast, cervix, and lung.

Materials and Methods:

This was a retrospective study of patients enrolled between 2015 and 2017. A questionnaire was filled in about socioeconomic aspects, patient history, tumor data, professionals who evaluated the patients, and the respective time delays. Statistical test included Mann–Whitney U test, univariate and multivariate test, and one-way ANOVA to evaluate the correlations.

Results:

Stage migration was significant with patient delay (P < 0.01). In head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) and Carcinoma lung, a significant correlation was found between referral delay and residence (P < 0.01) and treatment delay and reason for referral (HNSCC only) (P = 0.04). Referral delay and treatment delay were correlated to response in breast and cervix, respectively (P < 0.01).

Conclusion:

Social awareness, regularly updating primary care physicians about alarming symptoms of cancer, developing guidelines to identify these symptoms, promoting continuity of care, and enabling access to specialist expertise through prompt referral should all help prevent delays in cancer diagnosis.

Clinician Variation in Ordering and Completion of Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening in a Safety-Net Medical System

BACKGROUND

Less than 5% of eligible individuals in the United States undergo lung cancer screening. Variation in clinicians' participation in lung cancer screening has not been determined.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We studied medical providers who ordered ≥ 1 low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening from February 2017 through February 2019 in an integrated safety-net healthcare system. We analyzed associations between provider characteristics and LDCT orders and completion using chi-square, Fisher exact, and Student t tests, as well as ANOVA and multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among an estimated 194 adult primary care physicians, 144 (74%) ordered at least 1 LDCT, as did 39 specialists. These 183 medical providers ordered 1594 LDCT (median, 4; interquartile range, 2-9). In univariate and multivariate models, family practice providers (P < .001) and providers aged ≥ 50 years (P = .03) ordered more LDCT than did other clinicians. Across providers, the median proportion of ordered LDCT that were completed was 67%. The total or preceding number of LDCT ordered by a clinician was not associated with the likelihood of LDCT completion.

CONCLUSION

In an integrated safety-net healthcare system, most adult primary care providers order LDCT. The number of LDCT ordered varies widely among clinicians, and a substantial proportion of ordered LDCT are not completed.

Concentration-dependent Early Antivascular and Antitumor Effects of Itraconazole in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

Itraconazole has been repurposed as an anticancer therapeutic agent for multiple malignancies. In preclinical models, itraconazole has antiangiogenic properties and inhibits Hedgehog pathway activity. We performed a window-of-opportunity trial to determine the biologic effects of itraconazole in human patients.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had planned for surgical resection were administered with itraconazole 300 mg orally twice daily for 10-14 days. Patients underwent dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI and plasma collection for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses. Tissues from pretreatment biopsy, surgical resection, and skin biopsies were analyzed for itraconazole and hydroxyitraconazole concentration, and vascular and Hedgehog pathway biomarkers.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients were enrolled in this study. Itraconazole was well-tolerated. Steady-state plasma concentrations of itraconazole and hydroxyitraconazole demonstrated a 6-fold difference across patients. Tumor itraconazole concentrations trended with and exceeded those of plasma. Greater itraconazole levels were significantly and meaningfully associated with reduction in tumor volume (Spearman correlation, -0.71; P = 0.05) and tumor perfusion (K^trans; Spearman correlation, -0.71; P = 0.01), decrease in the proangiogenic cytokines IL1b (Spearman correlation, -0.73; P = 0.01) and GM-CSF (Spearman correlation, -1.00; P < 0.001), and reduction in tumor microvessel density (Spearman correlation, -0.69; P = 0.03). Itraconazole-treated tumors also demonstrated distinct metabolic profiles. Itraconazole treatment did not alter transcription of GLI1 and PTCH1 mRNA. Patient size, renal function, and hepatic function did not predict itraconazole concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

Itraconazole demonstrates concentration-dependent early antivascular, metabolic, and antitumor effects in patients with NSCLC. As the number of fixed dose cancer therapies increases, attention to interpatient pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics differences may be warranted.

A Multidisciplinary Lung Cancer Program: Does It Reduce Delay Between Diagnosis and Treatment?

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the USA, claiming more than 140,000 deaths annually. Delays in diagnosis and treatment can lead to missed opportunities for both curative and life prolonging therapies. This study aimed to evaluate duration of time to diagnosis and first treatment, as well as investigate reasons for delays in care.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all lung cancer cases diagnosed by Stony Brook's Lung Cancer Evaluation Center (LCEC) between 2013 and 2019. Demographic, radiologic, pathologic and clinical variables were investigated, including cancer staging, histology, and medical and family histories. Evaluations included the determination of median time from initial encounter to diagnosis, median time from diagnosis to start of treatment and an exploration of the factors that influence possible causes for delays in care.

RESULTS

The LCEC's comprehensive multidisciplinary lung nodule program yielded a median length of time from CT to PET of 11 days, PET to procedure of 13 days, procedure to treatment consult of 9 days, and from consult to treatment of 9 days. LCEC patients experienced an overall median of 44 days from initial presentation to first treatment compared to the national ideal of 62 days, thereby representing a 29% reduction in time from first CT to onset of treatment.

CONCLUSION

Delays in lung cancer diagnosis and treatment can negatively impact patient morbidity and mortality. This study suggests that a coordinated multidisciplinary lung cancer program may reduce delays in care, thereby improving patient outcomes.

Health systems influence on the pathways of care for lung cancer in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Globally, lung cancer is the most common cancer and cause of cancer-related deaths, responsible for nearly one in five deaths. Many health systems in low- and middle-income countries, including sub-Saharan Africa have weak organizational structure, which results in delayed lead time for lung cancer patient care continuum from diagnosis to palliative care.

AIM

To map evidence on the health systems issues impacting on the delays in timely lung cancer care continuum from diagnosis to palliative care in LMICs, including sub-Saharan Africa.

METHODS

A scoping review was performed following the method of Arksey and O'Malley. Systematic searches were performed using EBSCOhost platform, a keyword search from the following electronic databases were conducted: PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Science Direct, World Health Organization (WHO) library, and grey literature. The screening was guided by the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of the included studies was determined by Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT).

RESULTS

A total of 2886 articles were screened, and 236 met the eligibility criteria for this scoping review study. Furthermore, 155 articles were also excluded following abstract screening. Eighty-one articles were selected for full-article screening by two researchers with 10 being selected for independent detailed data extraction for synthesis. These studies were also subjected to methodological quality assessment. All included studies were conducted in LMICs mostly Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America and published between January 2008 and June 2018. The ten included studies described at least one interval in lung cancer care.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing wait time across this care continuum is needed to improve easy access to healthcare, quality care, survival and patient outcomes, as many patients still face longer wait times for diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer than recommended in several healthcare settings. A multidisciplinary team approach will help to reduce wait time and ensure that all patients receive appropriate care. Interventions are needed to address delays in lung cancer care in LMICs. Health-care providers at all levels of care should be educated and equipped with skills to identify lung cancer symptoms and perform or refer for appropriate diagnostic tests.

Mathematical oncology and it's application in non melanoma skin cancer - A primer for radiation oncology professionals

Cancers of the skin (the majority of which are basal and squamous cell skin carcinomas, but also include the rarer Merkel cell carcinoma) are overwhelmingly the most common of all types of cancer. Most of these are treated surgically, with radiation reserved for those patients with high risk features or anatomical locations less suitable for surgery. Given the high incidence of both basal and squamous cell carcinomas, as well as the relatively poor outcome for Merkel cell carcinoma, it is useful to investigate the role of other disciplines regarding their diagnosis, staging and treatment. Mathematical modelling is one such area of investigation. The use of mathematical modelling is a relatively recent addition to the armamentarium of cancer treatment. It has long been recognised that tumour growth and treatment response is a complex, non-linear biological phenomenon with many mechanisms yet to be understood. Despite decades of research, including clinical, population and basic science approaches, we continue to be challenged by the complexity, heterogeneity and adaptability of tumours, both in individual patients in the oncology clinic and across wider patient populations. Prospective clinical trials predominantly focus on average outcome, with little understanding as to why individual patients may or may not respond. The use of mathematical models may lead to a greater understanding of tumour initiation, growth dynamics and treatment response.

Reduced delays in diagnostic pathways for non-small cell lung cancer after local and National initiatives

OBJECTIVES

Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) may experience progression and stage shift due to delays in a complex and time-consuming diagnostic work-up. We have analyzed the impact of both a local and national intervention on total time to treatment (TTT).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All patients diagnosed with NSCLC at a Norwegian county hospital from 2007 to 2016 were reviewed. Logistic bottlenecks and delays were identified (2007-12) resulting in implementation of a local initiative with new diagnostic algorithm introduced by the beginning of 2013. In 2015, national diagnostic cancer pathways were implemented. TTT defined as time from received referral from the primary physician to start of treatment was compared in the three diagnostic time periods; baseline (2007-12), local (2013-14) and national (2015-16).

RESULTS

A total of 780 patients were included. Among patients treated with curative intent the median TTT decreased by 21 days, from 64 to 43 days (p < 0.001) while the mean number of diagnostic procedures increased from 3.5 to 3.9. In median regression analysis, the local initiative was associated with a reduction of estimated 7.8 days (95% CI 3.2, 12.3) in TTT, while the national initiative correlated with a reduction of estimated 14.9 days (95% CI 10.2, 19.6) compared to time at baseline. Covariates associated with longer TTT were stage I, use of PET-CT, diagnostic procedure at external hospital, and number of diagnostic procedures.

CONCLUSION

Local and national initiatives significantly reduced TTT in NSCLC. The effect was most pronounced among patients with disease available for curative treatment.

Timing, Sites, and Correlates of Lung Cancer Recurrence

INTRODUCTION

Understanding temporal and anatomic patterns of lung cancer recurrence could guide disease management and monitoring. However, these data are not available in population-based datasets and are not routinely recorded in clinical trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified cases of stage 1 to 3 lung cancer diagnosed January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2017, in the tumor registry of a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center. For cases with documented disease recurrence, we recorded anatomic site(s) and timing. We estimated time to recurrence using Kaplan-Meier methods. Associations between case characteristics and recurrence features were assessed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models and Cox regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 1619 cases of stage 1 to 3 lung cancer from 1549 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 466 (30%) patients developed recurrent lung cancer. The most common type of first recurrence was distant disease, most commonly central nervous system (CNS) (37%). In multivariable analyses, race (P = .02) and primary treatment modality (P < .001) correlated with recurrent disease, whereas tumor histology (P = .004) and primary treatment modality (P < .001) were associated specifically with distant recurrence. Patient age (P = .05) and initial TNM stage (P = .001) correlated with timing of recurrence.

CONCLUSION

In this single-center series of stage 1 to 3 lung cancer, recurrent disease was associated with race, histology, and treatment modality, and most commonly occurred in the CNS. Modulation of clinical and radiographic disease monitoring according to recurrence risk, timing, and site may offer a means to identify future lung cancer when it remains asymptomatic and highly treatable.

Access of patients with breast and lung cancer to chemotherapy treatment in public and private hospitals in the city of Buenos Aires

OBJECTIVES

Describe the time elapsed from the diagnosis to treatment with chemotherapy for patients with breast and lung cancer at public and private hospitals in Buenos Aires.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Three public and three private academic hospitals in Buenos Aires.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with breast (n = 168) or lung cancer (n = 100) diagnosis treated with chemotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

Clinical and sociodemographic data were collected in a stratified sample. We used the Kaplan-Meier estimator to analyse the time elapsed and the log rank test to compare both groups.

RESULTS

For breast cancer patients, median time elapsed between diagnosis and treatment with chemotherapy was 76 days (95% CI: 64-86) in public and 60 days (95% CI: 52-65) in private hospitals (P = 0.0001). For adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatments, median time was 130 (95% CI: 109-159) versus 64 (95% CI: 56-73) days (P < 0.0001) and 57 days (95% CI: 49-75) versus 26 (95% CI: 16-41) days, respectively (P = 0.0002). There were no significant differences in the time from first consultation to diagnosis. In patients with lung cancer, median time from diagnosis to treatment was 71 days (95% CI: 60-83) in public hospitals and 31 days (95% CI: 24-39) in private hospitals (P = 0.0002). In the metastatic setting, median time to treatment was 63 days (95% CI: 45-83) in public and 33 (95% CI: 26-44) days in private hospitals (P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant disparity in the access to treatment with chemotherapy for patients in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Timeliness of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment: a single-center experience

Background

Lung cancer is the number one cause of cancer death in America. Timely and appropriate care is critical in the management of lung cancer. We retrospectively reviewed our experience at the University of Kentucky to determine whether there were delays from initial presentation to diagnosis and from diagnosis to treatment. Furthermore, if delays existed, whether they affected overall survival and what factors contributed to these holdups in patient care.

Methods

This was a retrospective review of all patients who were diagnosed with lung cancer at the University of Kentucky between 2014 and 2017, including only those newly diagnosed at our institution and excluding patients who were diagnosed at other hospitals as well as patients with cancer recurrence. Out of a cohort of 3588 patients, only 517 were included.

Results

The average time between presentation and diagnosis was 43 days, and 86.7% of patients were diagnosed within 60 days. The average time to treatment from diagnosis was 27.5 days with 77.7% of patients being treated with either surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiation within 42 days.

Conclusion

The majority of our patients were diagnosed and treated within the recommended time. The 13.3% and 22.3% of patients who did not fall within this timeframe were delayed due to personal reasons, comorbidities, and/or “watchful waiting”. Mortality seemed to be unaffected by any delays in diagnosis or treatment. This analysis is the first step in understanding the challenges in patient care, and can be a tool to institute programs to help patients obtain necessary care.

Reasons for prolonged time for diagnostic workup for stage I-II lung cancer and estimated effect of applying an optimized pathway for diagnostic procedures

BACKGROUND

Minimizing the time until start of cancer treatment is a political goal. In Norway, the target time for lung cancer is 42 days. The aim of this study was to identify reasons for delays and estimate the effect on the timelines when applying an optimal diagnostic pathway.

METHODS

Retrospective review of medical records of lung cancer patients, with stage I-II at baseline CT, receiving curative treatment (n = 100) at a regional cancer center in Norway.

RESULTS

Only 40% started treatment within 42 days. The most important delays were late referral to PET CT (n = 27) and exercise test (n = 16); repeated diagnostic procedures because bronchoscopy failed (n = 15); and need for further investigations after PET CT (n = 11). The time from referral to PET CT until the final report was 20.5 days in median. Applying current waiting time for PET CT (≤7 days), 48% would have started treatment within 42 days (p = 0.254). "Optimal pathway" was defined as 1) referral to PET CT and exercise test immediately after the CT scan and hospital visit, 2) tumor board discussion to decide diagnostic strategy and treatment, 3) referral to surgery or curative radiotherapy, 4) tissue sampling while waiting to start treatment. Applying the optimal pathway, current waiting time for PET CT and observed waiting times for the other procedures, 80% of patients could have started treatment within 42 days (p < 0.001), and the number of tissue sampling procedures could have been reduced from 112 to 92 (- 16%).

CONCLUSION

Changing the sequence of investigations would significantly reduce the time until start of treatment in curative lung cancer patients at our hospital and reduce the resources needed.

Delay in Treatment After Cancer Diagnosis in Adolescents and Young Adults: Does Facility Transfer Matter?

Background: Timeliness is one of the fundamental yet understudied quality metrics of cancer care. Little is known about cancer treatment delay among adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients. This study assessed cancer treatment delay, with a specific focus on facility transfer and diagnosis/treatment interval. Methods: Based on MultiCare Health System's (MHS's) institutional cancer registry data of AYA patients diagnosed during 2006-2015, this study analyzed patient demographics, insurance, clinical characteristics, and time of diagnosis and treatment initiation. Chi-squared tests, cumulative hazard estimates, and Cox proportional regression were used for univariable analysis. Multivariate regression models were used to test the association between care transfer and days of interval or prolonged delay, controlling for baseline parameters. Results: Of 840 analytic AYA cases identified, 457 (54.5%) were both diagnosed and treated within MHS. A total of 45.5% were either diagnosed or treated elsewhere. Mean and median intervals for treatment initiation were 27.03 (95% CI = 21.94-33.14) and 8.00 days (95% CI = 5.00-11.00), respectively, with significant differences between patients with and without facility transfer. Transfer was significantly correlated with longer length of diagnosis-to-treatment interval. Treatment delay, ≥1 week, was associated with transfer, female sex, older age, no surgery involvement, and more treatment modalities. Treatment delay, ≥4 weeks, was associated with transfer, female sex, no insurance, and no surgery involvement. Conclusion: In a community care setting, the diagnosis-to-treatment interval is significantly longer for transferred AYA cancer patients than for patients without a transfer. Future studies are warranted to explore the prognostic implications and the reasons for delays within specific cancer types.

[The impact of the patient's age on the delay of the lung cancer treatment]

INTRODUCTION

The results from the medical literature regarding the influence of patient's age on the delay of treatment in lung cancer are controversial in the absence of a consensual definition. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of the patient's age on the delay of the lung cancer treatment.

METHODS

A retrospective monocentric study was performed including patients treated for a lung cancer in our department between November 1, 2014 and October 31, 2015. The delay of treatment was defined by the delay between the first abnormal imaging and the first treatment. The patients were divided into three groups depending on their age: group 1 with≤60 years old, group 2 between 60 and 70 years old, and group 3 with>70 years old. The statistical analysis was realized with Pearson's chi-squared and the Anova tests.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and forty-six patients were included with a mean age at 65±10 years. The mean delay of the treatment was 97±41 days. The mean delay of the treatment in patients with>70 years old was statically longer than the delay of treatment in patients with≤60 years old (116±98 days vs. 76±65 days, P=0.04), secondary to an extended time for the lung cancer surgery (129±75 days vs. 88±54 days, P=0.03).

CONCLUSION

In patients with>70 years old, the delay of treatment is longer than in other groups, secondary to an extended time for the preoperative assessment. An improvement in therapeutic management is necessary in our care system to shorten this delay.

Using a Dedicated Interventional Pulmonology Practice Decreases Wait Time Before Treatment Initiation for New Lung Cancer Diagnoses

PURPOSE

While there is significant mortality and morbidity with lung cancer, early stage diagnoses carry a better prognosis. As lung cancer screening programs increase with more pulmonary nodules detected, expediting definitive treatment initiation for newly diagnosed patients is imperative. The objective of our analysis was to determine if the use of a dedicated interventional pulmonology practice decreases time delay from new diagnosis of lung cancer or metastatic disease to the chest to treatment initiation.

METHODS

Retrospective chart analysis was done of 87 consecutive patients with a new diagnosis of primary lung cancer or metastatic cancer to the chest from our interventional pulmonology procedures. Demographic information and time intervals from abnormal imaging to procedure and to treatment initiation were recorded.

RESULTS

Patients were older (mean age 69) and former or current smokers (72%). A median of 27 days (1-127 days) passed from our diagnostic biopsy to treatment initiation. A median of 53 total days (2-449 days) passed from abnormal imaging to definitive treatment. Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration was the most commonly used diagnostic procedure (59%), with non-small cell lung cancer the majority diagnosis (64%). For surgical patients, all biopsy-negative lymph nodes from our procedures were cancer-free at surgical excision.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to prior reports from international and United States cohorts, obtaining a tissue biopsy diagnosis through a gatekeeper interventional pulmonology practice decreases median delay from abnormal imaging to treatment initiation. This finding has the potential to positively impact patient outcomes and requires further evaluation.

Time to treatment and survival in veterans with lung cancer eligible for curative intent therapy

BACKGROUND

The Institute of Medicine emphasizes care timeliness as an important quality metric. We assessed treatment timeliness in stage I-IIIA lung cancer patients deemed eligible for curative intent therapy and analyzed the relationship between time to treatment (TTT) and timely treatment (TT) with survival.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive cases of stage I-IIIA lung cancer deemed eligible for curative intent therapy at the VA San Diego Healthcare System between 10/2010-4/2017. We defined TTT as days from chest tumor board to treatment initiation and TT using guideline recommendations. We used multivariable (MVA) Cox proportional hazards regressions for survival analyses.

RESULTS

In 177 veterans, the median TTT was 35 days (29 days for chemoradiation, 36 for surgical resection, 42 for definitive radiation). TT occurred in 33% or 77% of patients when the most or least timely guideline recommendation was used, respectively. Patient characteristics associated with longer TTT included other cancer history, high simplified comorbidity score, stage I disease, and definitive radiation treatment. In MVA, TTT and TT [HR 0.53 (95% CI 0.27, 1.01) for least timely definition] were not associated with OS in stage I-IIIA patients, or disease-free survival in subgroup analyses of 122 stage I patients [HR 1.49 (0.62, 3.59) for least timely definition].

CONCLUSION

Treatment was timely in 33-77% of veterans with lung cancer deemed eligible for curative intent therapy. TTT and TT were not associated with survival. The time interval between diagnosis and treatment may offer an opportunity to deliver or improve other cancer care.

Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: A systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium

Timely follow-up for positive cancer screening results remains suboptimal, and the evidence base to inform decisions on optimizing the timeliness of diagnostic testing is unclear. This systematic review evaluated published studies regarding time to follow-up after a positive screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. The quality of available evidence was very low or low across cancers, with potential attenuated or reversed associations from confounding by indication in most studies. Overall, evidence suggested that the risk for poorer cancer outcomes rises with longer wait times that vary within and across cancer types, which supports performing diagnostic testing as soon as feasible after the positive result, but evidence for specific time targets is limited. Within these limitations, we provide our opinion on cancer-specific recommendations for times to follow-up and how existing guidelines relate to the current evidence. Thresholds set should consider patient worry, potential for loss to follow-up with prolonged wait times, and available resources. Research is needed to better guide the timeliness of diagnostic follow-up, including considerations for patient preferences and existing barriers, while addressing methodological weaknesses. Research is also needed to identify effective interventions for reducing wait times for diagnostic testing, particularly in underserved or low-resource settings. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:199-216. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Assessment of Oropharyngeal and Laryngeal Cancer Treatment Delay in a Private and Safety Net Hospital System

Objective

To examine the impact of treatment setting and demographic factors on oropharyngeal and laryngeal cancer time to treatment initiation (TTI).

Study Design

Retrospective case series.

Setting

Safety net hospital and adjacent private academic hospital.

Subjects and Methods

Demographic, staging, and treatment details were retrospectively collected for 239 patients treated from January 1, 2014, to June 30, 2016. TTI was defined as days between diagnostic biopsy and initiation of curative treatment (defined as first day of radiotherapy [RT], surgery, or chemotherapy).

Results

On multivariable analysis, safety net hospital treatment (vs private academic hospital treatment), initial diagnosis at outside hospital, and oropharyngeal cancer (vs laryngeal cancer) were all associated with increased TTI. Surgical treatment, severe comorbidity, and both N1 and N2 status were associated with decreased TTI.

Conclusion

Safety net hospital treatment was associated with increased TTI. No differences in TTI were found when language spoken and socioeconomic status were examined in the overall cohort.

How Long Are Cancer Patients Waiting for Oncological Therapy in Poland?

Background: The five-year relative survival rate in Poland is approximately 10% lower compared with the average for Europe. One of the factors that may contribute to the inferior treatment results in Poland could be the long time between cancer suspicion and the beginning of treatment. The aim of the study was to determine the real waiting time for cancer diagnosis and treatment in Poland. Methods: The study was carried out in six cancer centers on a group of 1373 patients, using a questionnaire to interview patients. The median waiting time was estimated as follows: (A) from suspicion (the date of the first visit, with symptoms, to a doctor or a preventive or screening test) until histopathological diagnosis; (B) from suspicion until initial treatment; and (C) from diagnosis until initial treatment. Results: The median times from suspicion to treatment, from suspicion to diagnosis, and from diagnosis to treatment, were 10.6, 5.6, and 5.0 weeks, respectively. Using multivariate analysis, the strongest influence was estimated, in a case of tumor localization, to be the method of initial treatment and facilities. Conclusion: The waiting time for cancer treatment in Poland is too long. The highest influence on waiting time was determined, in the case of tumors, as the type of cancer and factors related to the health care system.

Wait times for diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer: a single-centre experience

Background

Multiple clinical practice guidelines recommend rapid evaluation of patients with suspected lung cancer. It is uncertain whether delays in diagnosis and management have a negative effect on outcomes.

Methods

This retrospective study included 551 patients diagnosed with lung cancer through the diagnostic assessment program at the Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec between September 2013 and March 2015. Median wait times between initial referral, diagnosis, and first treatment were calculated and compared with recommended targets. Analyses were performed to evaluate for specific factors associated with longer wait times and for the effect of delays on the outcomes of progression-free survival (pfs), relapse-free survival (rfs) after primary surgical resection, and overall survival (os).

Results

Most patients were investigated and treated within recommended targets. Of the entire cohort, 379 patients were treated at our institution. Of those 379 patients, 311 (82%) were treated within recommended targets. In comparing patients within and outside target times, the only statistically significant difference was found in the distribution of treatment modalities: patients meeting targets were more likely to be treated with surgery or chemotherapy rather than with radiation. The pfs on first treatment modality was influenced by clinical stage, but not by time to therapy [hazard ratio (hr): 1.10; p = 0.65]. The os for the entire cohort was also influenced by stage, but not by delays (hr: 1.04; p = 0.87). For the 209 patients treated by surgery with curative intent, a significant reduction in rfs was associated with male sex and TNM stage, but not with delays (hr: 1.11; p = 0.83). The os after primary surgical resection was also associated with TNM stage, but not with delays (hr: 1.82; p = 0.43).

Conclusions

Recommended targets for wait times in the investigation and treatment of lung cancer can be achieved within a diagnostic assessment program. Compared with radiation treatment, treatment with surgery or chemotherapy is more likely to be completed within targets. Delays in investigation and treatment do not appear to negatively affect the clinical outcomes of os, rfs, and pfs. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate whether efficient work-up and treatment influence other important variables, such as quality of life, cost of care, and access to therapies while performance status is adequate.

Lung cancer care trajectory at a Canadian centre: an evaluation of how wait times affect clinical outcomes

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer continues to be one of the most common cancers in Canada, with approximately 28,400 new cases diagnosed each year. Although timely care can contribute substantially to quality of life for patients, it remains unclear whether it also improves patient outcomes. In this work, we used a set of quality indicators that aim to describe the quality of care in lung cancer patients. We assessed adherence with existing guidelines for timeliness of lung cancer care and concordance with existing standards of treatment, and we examined the association between timeliness of care and lung cancer survival.

METHODS

Patients with lung cancer diagnosed between 2010 and 2015 were identified from the Pulmonary Division Lung Cancer Registry at our centre.

RESULTS

We demonstrated that the interdisciplinary pulmonary oncology service successfully treated most of its patients within the recommended wait times. However, there is still work to be done to decrease variation in wait time. Our results demonstrate a significant association between wait time and survival, supporting the need for clinicians to optimize the patient care trajectory.

INTERPRETATION

It would be helpful for Canadian clinicians treating patients with lung cancer to have wait time guidelines for all treatment modalities, together with standard definitions for all time intervals. Any reductions in wait times should be balanced against the need for thorough investigation before initiating treatment. We believe that our unique model of care leads to an acceleration of diagnostic steps. Avoiding any delay associated with referral to a medical oncologist for treatment could be an acceptable strategy with respect to reducing wait time.

Timeliness of access to lung cancer diagnosis and treatment: A scoping literature review

The Institute of Medicine recently called for increased understanding of and commitment to timely care. Lung cancer can be difficult to diagnose, resulting in delays that may adversely affect survival; rapid diagnosis and treatment therefore is critical for enabling improved patient outcomes. This scoping review provides an update on timeliness of lung cancer care over the past decade. We searched PubMed for English-language articles published from 2007 to 2016 that report wait time intervals related to diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. Two authors independently reviewed titles and abstracts for inclusion. Abstracted data included sample size, patient population, study type, dates of study, wait times, and information on disparities, survival, costs, healthcare utilization, and interventions. The final review included 65 studies from 21 different countries. A total of 96 unique variations of wait intervals were reported (e.g., time to diagnosis from first pulmonologist visit, imaging, or initial evaluation), making comparisons across studies difficult. The most common interval was diagnosis to treatment initiation, with reported medians ranging from 6 to 45 days. Fourteen articles reported information on survival, 14 on healthcare utilization, 18 on disparities, and 14 on interventions; results varied by study. Significant variation exists in how access to care time delays are reported. Many patients across different facilities and countries appear to be facing substantial waits to receive lung cancer diagnosis and care. Further research, using common wait-interval metrics, is needed to evaluate and improve timeliness of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment.

Timeliness of Treatment Initiation and Associated Survival Following Diagnosis of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in South Carolina

OBJECTIVES

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patient survival depends on a number of factors, including early diagnosis and initiation of treatment. Standard treatment options for patients with NSCLC include surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact that the initiation of timely treatment has on patient survival among a cohort of privately insured patients with NSCLC in South Carolina.

METHODS

Data for the study were retrospectively obtained from the South Carolina Central Cancer Registry and the state health plan Blue Cross and Blue Shield claims. Patients were diagnosed as having NSCLC between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2010, were aged 18 years or older, and were covered under the state health plan for at least 1 year before diagnosis. The final study sample included 746 patients. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard modeling were conducted to examine factors associated with survival, stratified by stage at diagnosis.

RESULTS

The majority in the study cohort (80%) received timely (≤6 weeks) rather than untimely (>6 weeks) care (20%). The mean survival time for patients receiving timely treatment by stage was 36.9, 27.1, and 12.4 months for localized, regional, and distant metastasis, respectively. The mean survival time for patients receiving untimely care by stage was 39.4, 33.8, and 25.2 months for localized, regional, and distant metastasis, respectively. Among patients with NSCLC in the distant metastasis stage, those receiving timely treatment experienced significantly decreased survival (hazard ratio 2.2) in comparison to those receiving untimely care.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiation of treatment within 6 weeks is not associated with greater survival time across all stages of cancer (localized, regional, and distant metastasis). Additional research is needed to examine the impact of other treatment quality metrics on the survival of patients with NSCLC, different time thresholds for treatment initiation that may be more meaningful to survival among patients with NSCLC, and timely care among patients with NSCLC in other geographic areas and populations.

Socio-economic inequalities in stage at diagnosis, and in time intervals on the lung cancer pathway from first symptom to treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

Cancer diagnosis at an early stage increases the chance of curative treatment and of survival. It has been suggested that delays on the pathway from first symptom to diagnosis and treatment may be socio-economically patterned, and contribute to socio-economic differences in receipt of treatment and in cancer survival. This review aimed to assess the published evidence for socio-economic inequalities in stage at diagnosis of lung cancer, and in the length of time spent on the lung cancer pathway. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases were searched to locate cohort studies of adults with a primary diagnosis of lung cancer, where the outcome was stage at diagnosis or the length of time spent within an interval on the care pathway, or a suitable proxy measure, analysed according to a measure of socio-economic position. Meta-analysis was undertaken when there were studies available with suitable data. Of the 461 records screened, 39 papers were included in the review (20 from the UK) and seven in a final meta-analysis for stage at diagnosis. There was no evidence of socio-economic inequalities in late stage at diagnosis in the most, compared with the least, deprived group (OR=1.04, 95% CI=0.92 to 1.19). No socio-economic inequalities in the patient interval or in time from diagnosis to treatment were found. Socio-economic inequalities in stage at diagnosis are thought to be an important explanatory factor for survival inequalities in cancer. However, socio-economic inequalities in stage at diagnosis were not found in a meta-analysis for lung cancer.

PROSPERO PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42014007145.

External Validation of a Survival Nomogram for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Using the National Cancer Database

PURPOSE

Survival nomograms offer individualized predictions using a more diverse set of factors than traditional staging measures, including the American Joint Committee on Cancer Tumor Node Metastasis (AJCC TNM) Staging System. A nomogram predicting overall survival (OS) for resected, non-metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been previously derived from Asian patients. The present study aims to determine the nomogram's predictive capability in the US using the National Cancer Database (NCDB).

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of adults with resected, non-metastatic NSCLC entered into the NCDB between 2004 and 2012. Concordance indices and calibration plots analyzed discrimination and calibration, respectively. Multivariate analysis was also used.

RESULTS

A total of 57,313 patients were included in this study. The predominant histologies were adenocarcinoma (48.2%) and squamous cell carcinoma (31.3%), and patients were diagnosed with stage I-A (38.3%), stage I-B (22.7%), stage II-A (14.2%), stage II-B (11.5%), and stage III-A (13.3%). Median OS was 74 months. 1-, 3- and 5-year OS rates were 89.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 89.5-90.0%], 71.1% (95% CI 70.7-71.6%), and 55.7% (95% CI 54.7-56.6%), respectively. The nomogram's concordance index (C-index) was 0.804 (95% CI 0.792-0.817). AJCC TNM staging demonstrated higher discrimination (C-index 0.833, 95% CI 0.821-0.840).

CONCLUSIONS

The nomogram's individualized estimates accurately predicted survival in this patient collective, demonstrating higher discrimination in this population than in the developer's cohorts. However, the generalized survival estimates provided by traditional staging demonstrated superior predictive capability; therefore, AJCC TNM staging should remain the gold standard for the prognostication of resected NSCLC in the US.

Potential Obstacles in the Acquisition of Oral Anticancer Medications

PURPOSE

To determine the amount of time elapsed between prescriber order and patient receiving oral anticancer medication.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients with a diagnosis of cancer were prospectively identified in three outpatient oncology clinics when oral anticancer agents were prescribed during a 4-month observation period. For each patient, time to obtain medication was analyzed by the following time points: date of prescription, date of submission to insurance, date prior authorization was obtained, date financial assistance was received, date prescription was processed by pharmacy, and date patient received medication. Out-of-pocket cost and time spent by clinic staff to facilitate the medication acquisition process were recorded.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients were prescribed oral anticancer medication during the data collection period. For the 27 patients who were eligible for the primary end point, medication acquisition required a median of 10 days (range, 3 to 28 days). Overall, the rate-limiting step for medication acquisition was processing by the pharmacy, with a median of 6 days (range, 1 to 27 days). Most patients' prescription insurance plan covered a portion of medication cost, and the majority of patients considered their out-of-pocket expense to be affordable. Clinic staff spent a median of 2 hours per prescription to facilitate medication acquisition.

CONCLUSION

Patients may encounter process barriers in acquiring oral therapy, particularly because of pharmacy processing time, as well as high copays. Time to treatment initiation may have implications for patients' clinical outcomes. Adequate staff with dedicated time to facilitate this process should be used in the ambulatory oncology practice setting.

Determinants of Treatment Delays among Underserved Hispanics with Lung and Head and Neck Cancers

Background

Evidence is lacking to explain the reasons why treatment is delayed among disadvantaged Hispanic patients diagnosed with lung and head and neck cancers. Data indicate that treatment delays beyond 46 days increase the risk of death for individuals with these cancers.

Methods

A mixed-methods design was used to explore determinants of treatment delays by analyzing data from the medical records of 40 Hispanic patients and data from interviews with 29 Hispanic patients, care-givers, health care professionals, and patient navigators from a safety-net hospital.

Results

Of the 40 Hispanic patients, 35% initiated treatment 46 days or more after being diagnosed, but women experienced longer delays than men (average of 48 days). Women with few comorbid diseases (≤ 4) were more likely to experience treatment delays. Institutional-related determinants at publicly funded hospitals appear to delay treatment for patients at the safety-net hospital, and patient-related determinants common to underserved patients (eg, no health insurance coverage) are likely to further contribute to these delays.

Conclusions

Delayed treatment is associated with poor outcomes and low rates of survival in patients with lung and head and neck cancers. Therefore, action should be taken to improve the time between diagnosis and the initiation of treatment for disadvantaged Hispanic patients.

Typical Time to Treatment of Patients With Lung Cancer in a Multisite, US-Based Study

Introduction:

The importance of high-quality, timely lung cancer care and the need to have indicators to measure timeliness are increasingly discussed in the United States. This study explored when and why delays occur in lung cancer care and compared timeliness between two states with divergent disease incidence.

Methods:

Patients with small-cell or non–small-cell lung cancer were recruited through cancer centers, outpatient clinics, and community approaches, and interviewed over the phone. Statistical analysis of patient-reported dates included descriptive statistics and comparing time intervals between states and across the sites with Mann-Whitney U tests. Additionally, data from patients with longer timelines were qualitatively analyzed to identify possible reasons for delays.

Results:

On the basis of the dates reported by 275 patients, the median time from first presentation to a clinician to treatment was 52 days; 29% of patients experienced a wait of 90 days or more. Median times for key intervals were 36.5 days from abnormal radiograph to treatment, 9.5 days from initial presentation to specialist referral, 15 days from patient informed of diagnosis to first therapy, and 16 days from referral to treatment to first therapy. More than one quarter of patients perceived delays in care. No significant differences in length of time intervals were identified between states. Monitoring of small nodules, missed diagnosis, and other reasons for longer timelines were documented.

Conclusion:

Results defined typical time to treatment of patients with lung cancer across a variety of health systems and should facilitate establishing metrics for determining timeliness of lung cancer care.

Guideline-concordant timely lung cancer care and prognosis among elderly patients in the United States: A population-based study

OBJECTIVES

Elderly carry a disproportionate burden of lung cancer in the US. Therefore, its important to ensure that these patients receive quality cancer care. Timeliness of care is an important dimension of cancer care quality but its impact on prognosis remains to be explored. This study evaluates the variations in guideline-concordant timely lung cancer care and prognosis among elderly in the US.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database (2002-2007), we identified elderly patients with lung cancer (n=48,850) and determined time to diagnosis and treatment. We categorized patients by receipt of timely care using guidelines from the British Thoracic Society and the RAND Corporation. Hierarchical generalized logistic model was constructed to identify variables associated with receipt of timely care. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Log Rank test was used for estimation and comparison of the three-year survival. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was constructed to estimate lung cancer mortality risk associated with receipt of delayed care.

RESULTS

Time to diagnosis and treatment varied significantly among the elderly. However, majority of them (77.5%) received guideline-concordant timely lung cancer care. The likelihood of receiving timely care significantly decreased with NSCLC disease, early stage diagnosis, increasing age, non-white race, higher comorbidity score, and lower income. Paradoxically, survival outcomes were significantly worse among patients receiving timely care. Adjusted lung cancer mortality risk was also significantly lower among patients receiving delayed care, relative to those receiving timely care (Hazard ratio (HR)=0.68, 95% Confidence interval (CI)=(0.66-0.71); p ≤ 0.05).

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the critical need to address disparities in receipt of guideline-concordant timely lung cancer care among elderly. Although timely care was not associated with better prognosis in this study, any delays in diagnosis and treatment should be avoided, as it may increase the risk of disease progression and psychological stress in patients. Furthermore, given that lung cancer diagnostic and management services are covered under the Medicare program, observed delays in care among Medicare beneficiaries is also a cause for concern.

Wait Times Experienced by Lung Cancer Patients in the BC Southern Interior to Obtain Oncologic Care: Exploration of the Intervals from First Abnormal Imaging to Oncologic Treatment

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is associated with rapid disease progression, which can significantly progress over a duration of four to eight weeks. This study examines the time interval lung cancer patients from the interior of British Columbia (BC) experience while undergoing diagnostic evaluation, biopsy, staging, and preparation for treatment.

METHODS

A chart review of lung cancer patients (n=231) referred to the BC Cancer Agency Centre for the Southern Interior between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2011 was performed. Time zero was defined as the date of the first abnormal chest imaging. Time intervals, expressed as median averages, to specialist consult, biopsy, oncologic referral, initial oncology consultation, and commencement of oncologic treatment were obtained.

RESULTS

The median time interval from first abnormal chest imaging to a specialist consultation was 18 days (interquartile range, IQR, 7-36). An additional nine days elapsed prior to biopsy in the form of bronchoscopy, CT-guided biopsy, or sputum cytology (median; IQR, 3-21); if lobectomy was required, 18 days elapsed (median; IQR, 9-28). Eight days were required for pathologic diagnosis and subsequent referral to the cancer centre (median; IQR, 3-16.5). Once referral was received, 10 days elapsed prior to consultation with either a medical or radiation oncologist (median, IQR 5-18). Finally, eight days was required for initiation of radiation and/or chemotherapy (median; IQR, 1-15). The median wait time from detection of lung cancer on imaging to oncologic treatment in the form of radiation and/or chemotherapy was 65.5 days (IQR, 41.5-104.3). 

INTERPRETATION

Patients in the BC Southern Interior experience considerable delays in accessing lung cancer care. During this time, the disease has the potential to significantly progress and it is possible that a subset of patients may lose their opportunity for curative intent treatment.

A proliferation saturation index to predict radiation response and personalize radiotherapy fractionation

BACKGROUND

Although altered protocols that challenge conventional radiation fractionation have been tested in prospective clinical trials, we still have limited understanding of how to select the most appropriate fractionation schedule for individual patients. Currently, the prescription of definitive radiotherapy is based on the primary site and stage, without regard to patient-specific tumor or host factors that may influence outcome. We hypothesize that the proportion of radiosensitive proliferating cells is dependent on the saturation of the tumor carrying capacity. This may serve as a prognostic factor for personalized radiotherapy (RT) fractionation.

METHODS

We introduce a proliferation saturation index (PSI), which is defined as the ratio of tumor volume to the host-influenced tumor carrying capacity. Carrying capacity is as a conceptual measure of the maximum volume that can be supported by the current tumor environment including oxygen and nutrient availability, immune surveillance and acidity. PSI is estimated from two temporally separated routine pre-radiotherapy computed tomography scans and a deterministic logistic tumor growth model. We introduce the patient-specific pre-treatment PSI into a model of tumor growth and radiotherapy response, and fit the model to retrospective data of four non-small cell lung cancer patients treated exclusively with standard fractionation. We then simulate both a clinical trial hyperfractionation protocol and daily fractionations, with equal biologically effective dose, to compare tumor volume reduction as a function of pretreatment PSI.

RESULTS

With tumor doubling time and radiosensitivity assumed constant across patients, a patient-specific pretreatment PSI is sufficient to fit individual patient response data (R(2) = 0.98). PSI varies greatly between patients (coefficient of variation >128 %) and correlates inversely with radiotherapy response. For this study, our simulations suggest that only patients with intermediate PSI (0.45-0.9) are likely to truly benefit from hyperfractionation. For up to 20 % uncertainties in tumor growth rate, radiosensitivity, and noise in radiological data, the absolute estimation error of pretreatment PSI is <10 % for more than 75 % of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine radiological images can be used to calculate individual PSI, which may serve as a prognostic factor for radiation response. This provides a new paradigm and rationale to select personalized RT dose-fractionation.